On Wednesday, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz stood by the coffee giant’s new “Race Together” promotion. Designed to spark intelligent discussions on race, the campaign has been disparaged for being naive and using racial tensions to buoy efforts, said The Grio.
The company plans to ask U.S. employees to write “Race Together” on coffee cups to encourage dialogue. Starbucks also plans to publish “conversation guides” on the issue. These will include questions like, “How have your racial views evolved from those of your parents?”
During Starbucks’ annual meeting in Seattle, Schultz said the company wants to use its huge reach to better humanity. “Some in the media will criticize Starbucks for having a political agenda. Our intentions are pure.”
The initiative is the latest example of a large corporation looking to align its brands with major social issues to attract consumers. But efforts can only work if consumers see a clear connection between the social cause and the company’s products, said The Grio.
Many social media posts are calling Starbucks’ concept “opportunistic.” Critics also contend that generating political commentary is not the company’s place. Others wonder if employees could really invoke productive discussions.
Starbucks’ communications executive Corey duBrowa temporarily blocked the company’s Twitter account following a plethora of these type comments, said The Grio. duBrowa later said in a statement on Medium that he he was being “personally attacked in a cascade of negativity” and that he had become overwhelmed.
Schultz said he did not believe the coffee chain could rectify the “centuries old problems of racism.” But he thinks it can make a difference and that employees do not have to take part. Stores will give customers an additional beverage or cover up cups if they dislike the message. “This is not a marketing or PR exercise,” Schultz said.
Laura Ries, an Atlanta-based branding consultant, told The Grio that addressing big issues has become a means for corporations to become “part of the conversation.” Otherwise, nobody would bother getting on Twitter to discuss brands, she said.
Despite criticism of Starbucks, there are companies that have been successful playing the “cause for humanity” card. Dove soap’s “Real Beauty” campaign, which features women who do not resemble typical models, has been very well received. Always, which makes feminine hygiene products, also received kudos for an ad that ran during the Super Bowl seeking to empower young girls. But these messages had close ties to the advertisers’ products; people do not associate morning coffee with race.
“There’s nothing wrong with talking about race relations,” Ries said in The Grio. “But is it something people naturally associate with Starbucks? It’s not.”
Political “involvement” is not new for Starbucks Corp. In late 2012, the company asked employees to write “Come together” on cups to send a message to lawmakers about stalled budget negotiations, said The Grio.
The following year, Starbucks ran newspaper ads saying guns were not welcome in its stores after the stores became the site of gun rallies. But the company did not issue a firearms ban. Schultz said at the time that Starbucks was not taking a position on guns, which could have turned off customers.